Pitting Americans against each other in the “Climate Change” debate
Tornado warnings spark review of weather vs climate
The Democrats’ green justice star, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY), recently took to social media during a tornado warning in Washington, D.C., and swiftly tried to connect it to climate change.
This prompted one professional meteorologist to call her out for not knowing “the difference between weather and climate.”
The freshman congresswoman began by sharing a video on Instagram briefly showing the conditions outside, as heavy rains drenched the region and prompted a brief, and rare, tornado warning inside the Beltway.
“There’s people stuck outside. We need to get them out,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “This is crazy.”
…”Tornadoes are challenging to link to climate change links due to their nature (geographically, limited, acute patterns, how they form, etc.),” Ocasio-Cortez told her followers as she reviewed the article. “But we DO know that tornadoes HAVE been changing. They are no longer being limited to the Great Plains, and are shifting to other regions of the country.”
“The climate crisis is real y’all … guess we’re at casual tornadoes in growing regions of the country,” she later wrote on Instagram.
Meteorologist Ryan Maue, though, argued that she was confusing climate change with “weather” in the capital region.
“The Congresswoman @AOC does not know the difference between weather and climate,” wrote Maue. “Let’s try an easy analogy: Weather is what outfit you wear heading out the door. Climate is your closet wardrobe.”
However, this interaction underscores how the climate change debate is being presented in the media in ways that seemingly pit groups of Americans against each other.
For example, the Hill proclaims that “Young voters and voters of color are key to climate policy”:
Overall, Latino, black and Asian registered voters are significantly more likely than whites to prioritize the environment. When it comes to climate change, the polling data is striking: 70 percent of Latinos and 56 percent of blacks believe the earth is getting warmer because of human activity, compared to 44 percent of whites. Additionally, 54 percent of people of color think addressing global warming should be a top priority for the government, compared to 22 percent of whites — a gap that has widened by 10 percent over the last decade as fewer whites consider it a priority.
In Florida, where black folks make up nearly 14 percent of the electorate, they are 18 percent more likely than whites to list climate/environment as a top priority.
In Nevada, where Latinos comprise almost 20 percent of the electorate, they are 10 percent more likely than whites to prioritize environmental protection. And it’s personal: 67 percent of Latinos, compared to 50 percent of whites, said their lives would be personally impacted if nothing was done to reduce global warming.
And the New York Times warns that “Older People Are Contributing to Climate Change, and Suffering From It”:
The climate change story has plenty of villains; seniors are hardly wrecking the environment on their own. Still, the demographic trends do not bode well.
“There will be more warm days in most areas because of climate change,” Dr. Estiri said. “There will be more energy use by the older group. And because of the population aging, there will be more people in that age group. These trends will amplify each other.”
But in a world that is both warming and graying, older adults suffer disproportionately from climate change.
Personally, I am so looking forward to the Democratic Party’s 2020 platform plank that older, white voters are environmental villains.
No matter how many studies are done, true science relies on facts. While there is no denying that tornadoes are dramatic and devastating, is there a climate trend apparent based in the data?
The following is a graph showing the number powerful tornadoes through recent decades, prepared by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration:
Clearly, there is no trend. However, based on the data, I can predict the media will continue ginning-up divisions between Americans and ignore data and facts while doing so.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
When the people who are given grants and other government moneys to investigate the environment, it automatically brings their studies into question.
Billions have changed hands for the leftists pushing this stuff.
And when they commission a group to find the most effective phrases which cause panic and worry in the populous, it tells you they are lying to keep the cash cow going.
This isn’t much different from Herr Mueller’s investigation. He knew from day one there was not there there. He assembled a team of leftist lawyers to try to make something out of nothing. Used horrendous tactics designed to ruin lives to push the effort of making some kind of charge stick to remove Trump. And it still took nearly 2 years to say “never mind”, but despite finding nothing we will parse language so the leftist friends of ours can keep trying to impeach Trump for not doing any criminal acts. Millions of dollars spent to investigate nothing.
It is no different with Climate Change, or the older Global Warming, or Anthropogenic Global Warming, or even older, Global Cooling, and now trying to make it something with Climate disaster, or some such label to create fear, all to keep the money flowing.
Of course anyone who takes the word of that twit AOC for being worth anything more than toilet paper should maybe go back to kindergarten and see if they can become more intelligent than a rock.
I am so sick of her narcissistic BS. If she was tops in her class it’s only because she slept her way there.
If we are going to require the left to stick to the facts and not rumors or unproved ideas, we should do the same.
You said concerning Mueller: “He knew from day one there was not there there. He assembled a team of leftist lawyers to try to make something out of nothing”
Unless Mueller was calling you daily with updates, you do NOT know this. And as an investigator, he was required to look all the data before coming to a conclusion. And he passed those conclusions on to Barr.
I agree that it was a waste of time in general. And i look forward to the new investigation that just was launched by Barr.
I might get downvoted, but we can’t judge motive nor what someone is thinking.
most of the time, I have no idea of a baseball pitcher intended to hit a batter, and neither do you.
If we are going to require the left to stick to the facts
“Require”? Hahahahaaaa. There’s no way to force them to do that. And there’s no indication that Lefties will start becoming knowledgeable, reflective, scientific, honest, logical, or adult any time soon.
They have to be beaten anyway, or we’re all headed for the Dark Ages again.
You are right. “Require” was a poor choice of words.
The idea was that we still have integrity, even if they don’t.
we can’t judge motive nor what someone is thinking.”
About that – there were two main claims made against Trump and his campaign, which were investigated – Collusion and Obstruction. The first, Collusion was disproven immediately; in fact, when the exculpatory evidence is declassified, according to Trey Gowdy and Mark Meadows, who have seen it, we are all going to know that there was NEVER any actual evidence of “Collusion” to begin with; the whole thing was cooked up as a joint operation of the FBI and the CIA. (And Mueller would indeed have known this on Day 1, since he had access to all the classified evidence.)
The second charge, Obstruction, is all about “judging motive and knowing what someone is thinking.” Which as you say, is impossible to do, especially when there is no hard evidence of same.
I would point out that your defense of Mueller consists of claiming that he was right in attempting to do something for 2 years that even you say cannot be done. Why did he do it?
I am more concerned with tectonic plate shift.
Now there’s a task for 4chan – start a panic about tectonics and a demand to stop the movement of tectonic plates! How long before a progressive champion would arise in Congress dedicated to spending trillions to prevent plate movement?
Oberlin had a giant “Reunite Pangaea” banner across the library while I was there. Sadly, that was before “Subduction leads to Orogeny” caught on.
Anyone watching Chernobyl? I imagine that is disinformation at its worst.
Wait, let me ask a dinosaur…
“In Florida, where black folks make up nearly 14 percent of the electorate, they are 18 percent more likely than whites to list climate/environment as a top priority.”
In Florida, most waterfront property is probably owned by white people who would be concerned about “climate change” if rising sea level were actually affecting their properties’ value. Waterfront property values in FL are rising (although still recovering from the housing crash, and are lower then peak levels). What is shrinking is the premium paid for waterfront property, as the value of other properties has recovering more quickly.
Everyone, please check out Tony Heller’s YouTube videos on “climate change.” He demonstrates succinctly that the books are being cooked to make the (alleged) science to work.
Remember, the only “settled science” are theories that have been disproved. So the next time a climate alarmist tells you “the science is settled,” agree with him – he’s correct, he just doesn’t understand how and why.
Overall, Latino, black and Asian registered voters are significantly more likely than whites to prioritize the environment.
OK, good, divide and conquer. It’s Whitey vs. everyone else.
When it comes to climate change, the polling data is striking: 70 percent of Latinos and 56 percent of blacks believe the earth is getting warmer because of human activity, compared to 44 percent of whites.
Whoopsies, what happened to the Asians? If it’s going to be Whitey against the Oppressed, it certainly lends gravitas if you can work the Asians in there somehow. Maybe they’re not dumb enough to believe in AGW.
Additionally, 54 percent of people of color think addressing global warming should be a top priority for the government, compared to 22 percent of whites
So now we’re back to POCs. So, are Asians back in?
“Hey guys, if we promise to take away all those other guy’s money and give it to you, will you say you believe in Climate Change? You will? Thanks, Guys!!!” (you don’t mind if we skim a bit as a “transfer fee, do you?)
Someone needs to intriduce the 55mph speed limit into the green new deal so they will pick it up.
“People are dying! We need to pass it NOW before more people die of auto accidents, much less the larger carbon footprint!”.
All I Know is yesterday afternoon, it was 92 degrees and this morning it was 71. If that isn’t climate change, I don’t know what is.
Phoenix is having an unusually cool spring, should be about 100, in the mid 80’s
“Clearly, there is no trend.”
I don’t have the data to chart the trend, but my eyeballs suggest there is a trend, a downward trend.
The bottom line on the ‘climate debate’ is that its hysterical proponents are looking to loot the nation and the free world.
Just look at Al Gore’s ‘climate’ change’ riches.
As a research chemist I am always taken aback by the general attitude displayed in this debate with one side claiming that those who disagree with their climate paranoia are “deniers”. Others take it even further demanding “deniers” be removed from their jobs or even jailed.
>
Think about it. Isn’t being skeptical and questioning everything in science a basic tenant of science? Aren’t scientists renown for always trying to disprove various theories, find flaws with published papers, and so forth? Of course they are because healthy debate is as essential to science as gasoline is to a car operating correctly.
>
So why then is the left trying to deny, even attack, this basic tenant of science and the sceintific process? The only available answer is that global warming theories cannot stand on their own merit and the entire theory must be protected no matter what because it is a political issue, not a scientific one. I hate to break this to you, but that is not how science works – or at least how it used to work.
I can never forget the leftist “climate researcher” from California who, 2 or 3 years ago, became extremely annoyed that the data sets were not lining up with his predictions, and in all seriousness he proposed that the Temperature database should not use physical measurements anymore, but only Computer Generated numbers. Because Physical Measurements were proving to be just too darned unpredictable.
People are not getting out more here in south eastern Ontario because it’s been too damn cold. May 24th always marked the beginning of the planting season. Not this year. Opening Day at our local golf course,which was scheduled for May 25 was cancelled. I golfed yesterday. The course is drenched. Not enough evaporation. Looking at the temperature predictions for the next 2 weeks, the high on most days will be in the 60’s with the highest temerature reaching only 72 on 2 days.
I prefer the predictions of deceased solar scientist Theodor Landscheidt to those of AOC.
Americans should be concerned about the Scam known as climate change,it’s not about the climate but rather our Republic and whether it remains a Republic.
Investor’s Business Daily
U.N. Official Reveals Real Reason Behind Warming Scare
2/10/2015
Economic Systems: The alarmists keep telling us their concern about global warming is all about man’s stewardship of the environment. But we know that’s not true. A United Nations official has now confirmed this.
At a news conference last week in Brussels, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.
“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” she said.
Referring to a new international treaty environmentalists hope will be adopted at the Paris climate change conference later this year, she added: “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”
The only economic model in the last 150 years that has ever worked at all is capitalism. The evidence is prima facie: From a feudal order that lasted a thousand years, produced zero growth and kept workdays long and lifespans short, the countries that have embraced free-market capitalism have enjoyed a system in which output has increased 70-fold, work days have been halved and lifespans doubled.
Figueres is perhaps the perfect person for the job of transforming “the economic development model” because she’s really never seen it work. “If you look at Ms. Figueres’ Wikipedia page,” notes Cato economist Dan Mitchell: Making the world look at their right hand while they choke developed economies with their left.
https://www.investors.com/climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism
California temps are 10-20 degrees below normal. Snowed yesterday at 5K feet in No Cal and 6K feet in So Cal. We cancelled our Memorial Day BBQ yesterday in San Diego due to rain and cold.
I think we are heading into a period where this will be the ‘new normal’ due to the lack of sun spot activity. We’ll be begging for a little global warming in a the next 10 years, man-made (LOL) or otherwise.
CO2 doesn’t heat the air.
1. It has the same permittivity as O2 and N. What makes CO2 the magic gas.
2. “Greenhouse gas” is an oxymoron. Greenhouses allow radiation and inhibit convection. Any gas that inhibits convection is by definition not a gas. This oxyMORON is the primary “scientific” fact cited by the climate hoaxers.
3. CO2 changes 20% to 40% from winter to summer. Yet there is no hysteresis in the spring or fall which is proof the CO2 has less than .001 degree of effect. It also means that the CO2 that is in the air today will mostly be gone in 3 or 4 years.
4. Water vapor has 100 times the effect of CO2, but in both cases they average the temperature (not warming) which is beneficial.
5. The “climate models” have been completely and embarrassingly wrong every year for the last 25 years.
I could go on for quite a while, but climate change has no scientific fact that supports it. The facts listed here are undeniable facts that CO2 doesn’t affect temperature. No one has ever addressed them.